World in Flames is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. World In Flames is a highly detailed game covering the both Europe and Pacific Theaters of Operations during World War II. If you want grand strategy this game is for you.
I watched it here in Paris on iMax 70mm, and I found it amazing.
I won't spoil,
Oh come one ... how does it end. [:D]
By the way, is anyone familiar with the BBC series "Foyle's War". He's a chief detective and it's set during WW-2. His son has just graduate college and joined the RAF. The series starts in 1939 before Germany invaded Poland and ends in 1948 or 1949 at the start of the Cold War. There's is an episode that covers the evacuation at Dunkirk though from the perspective of the Brit's at home. I really enjoyed the series. It's a "who done it" type detective series.
+1 to Foyle's war. They actually enlisted help from the British War Museum to get the uniforms and period pieces correct. Even to the point of removing street signs, etc. for scenes. The show actually does a really great job of showing the turmoil within GB after the war which I had no idea even existed. Nor did I know that as soon as the war was over, the US stopped all aid to the UK which really hurt them. Pretty amazing show. Plus my wife really liked it too [:)]
Foyle's War was excellent. Unfortunately, after series five the show was cancelled, and even though it was later reinstated, the scripts for most of 1943 and early 1944 had been thrown out. This would have been an interesting part of the war to explore, as the Allies moved over to the general offensive and final victory was becoming obvious.
Anyway, it seems odd that they were just lost forever. I still have paperwork from the early 90s and there are things on my hard-drive from about three computers ago.
yeah no worries Mr. Battleship, I look forward to your review of the movie, too
with so little action on the ground in this movie, I did not feel any great loss in not seeing the special 70 mm print. I'm not sure lots of sea and sky in so many shots really need much special treatment. I am glad though that I did see it in a 1930s Art Deco theater with an enormous screen, rather than some suburban multi-plex with a low roof and a screen now being equalled in many a Man Cave across the land. (not mine though, I live in a real cave).
This is the review I wrote for the General Discussion forum after seeing the film on Friday - before all the total BS about 'the French' and 'the Russian'...[8|]
Dunkirk – Spoiler Alert
I have just got back from seeing the film. What can I say? It was intense and lived up to the hype.
The film has no frills, no character development, no backstory, there is no love interest and indeed there is very little dialogue. It’s simply a story of essentially four small groups of people – one from the Army, RN/Army officers on the Dunkirk mole, a Royal Air Force fighter patrol and men aboard one of the little ships. I guess the Royal Navy is a fifth group as they are naturally pretty much ever present, invariably adding something to each of the stories – largely as a result of their ships getting sunk having repeatedly put themselves in harm’s way to try and get the Army home.
One immediate thing I noticed was at the very start when a few lines were used to explain what was happening; it was not the Germans attacking and surrounding the French and British – it was ‘the enemy’. Okay…. that seems a little silly but I guess we are all friends now so….
I was a little confused near the start as one minute it was daytime and the next it was dark or heading that way. However, it quickly became apparent that the action is not strictly chronological. By the way this way of telling the story makes it look like the RAF patrol shoots down half the Luftwaffe, but one sees some of the scenes more than once from different viewpoints. This jumbled timeline idea actually works well.
The film doesn’t seek to tell the story of Dunkirk. The French are acknowledged - holding the perimeter along with a British rear-guard. Amongst the limited dialogue, there is reference to the German tanks being halted, the Luftwaffe being given the job of destroying the BEF and their French Allies, expectation that 30-45,000 British troops only are expected to be rescued, and that the RAF are trying to conserve aircraft and pilots for the battle still to come. But enough of the story is told through the trials and tribulations of the individual groups and the brief dialogue to make clear what is going on even if one knows nothing about this episode in history.
I was expecting some sort of soundtrack what with Hans Zimmer being involved but instead, during the action, there was a sort of noise as opposed to a dramatic music score. This worked really well too and added to the intensity.
How did the film fare on the trembling bottom lip front? Well there were a couple of occasions on which it was a good job I had the Kleenex on hand – I wasn’t emotional you understand, I just had something in my eye….
In summary – a great job Mr Nolan!
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Just to be clear though - in case anyone gets the wrong impression from your post - the French were not 'left until the end'. Yes, imo, Nolan was right, in fairness, to show the French being refused access at one point early in the process, but it was most certainly not the case that the French were all left until the end (clearly those guarding the escape route for others being an exception).
Yes Michael Caine was the ground controller [:)]
If I recall the figures correctly, they evacuated around 338,000 troops of whom 128,000 were not CW. The majority of those 128,000 were French, but not all of them stayed to become part of the Free French army. Many returned to France voluntarily after Vichy was declared.
It's difficult to find numbers, but some of those French troops evacuated were sent directly to French ports further west. How many, and whether they would have been in any fit state to take part in Fall Rot I don't know.
Equally I don't know if there was time to get any French that were evacuated to Britain back to France before she fell - probably not?
Of those that were in the UK at the time Petain signed the armistice yes, the number that volunteered to stay and fight on were very small. I certainly don't blame them - their country was not officially fighting on (unlike the Belgians, Dutch, Poles, Norwegians etc) and so the choice was far from easy for them with families back in France.
As for Petain's decision not to fight on from North Africa? Well that is a story for another time perhaps.....
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
was the word "Jerries" ever heard in the film? I don't think so.
What about Nazi? Did hear that word mentioned? Did you see a swastika?
"Nazi" once, in the Churchill speech.
I really enjoyed the film. Should've been more smoke above the port, and more troops on the beach, they say. Nolan didn't want to compromise with CGI apparently.
was the word "Jerries" ever heard in the film? I don't think so.
What about Nazi? Did hear that word mentioned? Did you see a swastika?
warspite1
Dunkirk Spoiler Alert
There was a swastika on the Me-109s but no, we don't see see the 'enemy' except for their aircraft - and a brief glimpse right at the very end of some soldiers.
I don't believe Germans are ever mentioned (but may be wrong). If they are its literally once or twice.
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
I experienced it mostly as a disjointed mess, lacking in any sense of direction or purpose and continually struggled to understand what was happening and why.
For most of the film I was tense and anxious, feeling trapped and claustrophobic, flinching at the volume of the gunfire and wail of the Stukas.
When, almost at the last moment, it miraculously came together, it was a deliverance and relief this was all over and I could get away and go back home.
In short, it was horrible ....
but as an emotional representation of what Dunkirk was probably like (based on the accounts I have read of those who were there), brilliant and inspiring.
Not sure whether I'll go to see it again at the cinema but I'll certainly add it to my film collection.
I experienced it mostly as a disjointed mess, lacking in any sense of direction or purpose and continually struggled to understand what was happening and why.
warspite1
Presumably by the end of the film you 'got' the three timelines interweaving and that we were seeing some scenes more than once from different perspectives? If so, and now armed with what is going on, try seeing it a second time - it is even better second time around [:)].
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
I experienced it mostly as a disjointed mess, lacking in any sense of direction or purpose and continually struggled to understand what was happening and why.
warspite1
Presumably by the end of the film you 'got' the three timelines interweaving and that we were seeing some scenes more than once from different perspectives? If so, and now armed with what is going on, try seeing it a second time - it is even better second time around [:)].
t
Cognitively yes. I was trying to convey a sense of my subjective experience of the effect of the asynchronous timelines and general atmosphere.
For that subjective emotional experience I think the film is a masterpiece.
I experienced it mostly as a disjointed mess, lacking in any sense of direction or purpose and continually struggled to understand what was happening and why.
warspite1
Presumably by the end of the film you 'got' the three timelines interweaving and that we were seeing some scenes more than once from different perspectives? If so, and now armed with what is going on, try seeing it a second time - it is even better second time around [:)].
t
Cognitively yes. I was trying to convey a sense of my subjective experience of the effect of the asynchronous timelines and general atmosphere.
For that subjective emotional experience I think the film is a masterpiece.
warspite1
And on a scale of 1 to 100 just how awesome was the sound and sight of those Spitfires? Let's put it this way - there was a clean up required in row T....
Last year as it was a special birthday, my partner and parents got me an hours flight in the Belgium equivalent of the Tiger Moth. What an experience. After a loop and barrel roll, the pilot handed over and I spent the rest of the flight until landing approach flying around the Cotswolds. For my next special I'd love to fulfill a boyhood ambition to fly a Spitfire. Better start saving. I'll need the next 9 years to get the funds together.
Last year as it was a special birthday, my partner and parents got me an hours flight in the Belgium equivalent of the Tiger Moth. What an experience. After a loop and barrel roll, the pilot handed over and I spent the rest of the flight until landing approach flying around the Cotswolds. For my next special I'd love to fulfill a boyhood ambition to fly a Spitfire. Better start saving. I'll need the next 9 years to get the funds together.
warspite1
Cool [8D]
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Apparently some feel that the movie Dunkirk was to male. I'm speechless [&:]
"Dunkirk felt like an excuse for men to celebrate maleness — which apparently they don't get to do enough," Marie Claire's Mehera Bonner wrote in her review.
Apparently some feel that the movie Dunkirk was to male. I'm speechless [&:]
"Dunkirk felt like an excuse for men to celebrate maleness — which apparently they don't get to do enough," Marie Claire's Mehera Bonner wrote in her review.
However... seriously?? The movie shows women working as nurses in a war zone - and not in the rear lines, but under the bombs! Women do fu**ing DIE when their ships are sunk.
I want to be clear: I'm all for women rights (I want for my daughters to live in a more equal society) and even LGBT's ones. Articles like these ones actually damage the cause, by opening it to (sadly rightful) ridicule. I think that in medical terms the authors could be diagnosed with extreme obsession and/or mania. And, while I do respect the inner suffering coming from mental disorders, these people should see professional counsel - not be allowed to actually write AGAINST the very cause they are obsessed by.
"Yes darling, I served in the Navy for eight years. I was a cook..."
"Oh dad... so you were a God-damned cook?"
(My 10 years old daughter after watching "The Hunt for Red October")
